Impact Of Bullying And Depression Psychology Essay

Published Date: 23 Mar 2015

Bullying may be defined as the activity of repeated, aggressive behavior intended to hurt another person, physically or mentally. Bullying is characterized by an individual behaving in a certain way to gain power over another person (Besag, 1989).The word "bully" was first used in the 1530s meaning "sweetheart", the verb "to bully" is first attested in 1710.

In literary work bullying was used by Charles Dickens and published in 1838. Oliver Twist was one of the first novels in the English language to focus on the bullying and criminal maltreatment of a child protagonist. Dr Dan Olweus did the world first systematic research on bullying in 1970. The results of his studies were published in a Swedish book in 1973 and in the United States in 1978 under the title Aggression in the Schools, Bullies and Whipping Boys. In 1980 Dr Dan Olweus proposed enacting law against bullying in school. By the mid-1990s, these arguments led to legislation against bullying by the Swedish and Norwegian parliaments.

In 1993, Olweus wrote Bullying at School: What We Know and What We Can do, and is now widely considered to be the world's leading authority on bullying behavior. Olweus groundbreaking research and intervention programs have played a significant role in increasing awareness that bullying is a growing social problem, one that must be taken seriously by researchers, educators, lawmakers, parents, students, and society in general.

In 2001, The Journal of the American Medical Association reported that more than 160,000 students skip school every day because they are anxious and afraid of being bullied by other students. School is suppose to be a safe haven where learning takes place not where a student has to defend themselves from peers because of differences.

In January 2006, the US Congress passed a law making it a federal crime to "annoy, abuse, threaten or harass" another person over the internet. One of the first cyber bullying laws is passed in California; Assembly Bill 86 2008 gives school administrators the authority to discipline students for bullying others offline or online.

On Friday 16 March 2012 schools throughout Australia will join together to celebrate the annual National Day of Action against Bullying and Violence. The focus of the 2012 day will be on parents and families delightful a stand together with school communities and recognizing the essential role everyone plays.

Physical bullying includes hitting, kicking, tripping, pinching and pushing or damaging property.

Verbal bullying includes name calling, insults, teasing, threats, homophobic or racially prejudiced remarks, or verbal abuse.

Covert bullying is often harder to recognize and can be carried out behind the bullied person's back. It is intended to harm someone's social reputation and/or cause embarrassment.

Cyber bullying is overt or covert bullying behaviors using digital technologies. Examples include harassment via a mobile phone, setting up a defamatory personal website or intentionally without someone from social networking spaces. Cyber bullying can happen at any time. It can be in public or in private and sometimes only identified to the target and the person bullying. 

Bullying have negative impact on people either it is verbal, physical, social or cyber bullying. Its not just effect the physical health of the person but also have effects on the psychological health of the person who become victim of the bullying.

The psychological troubles which face by the sufferers of bullying like stress, anxiety, depression, isolation and the savoir psychological problem is suicide.

Bullying is killing our kids. Being different is killing our kids and the kids who are bullying are dying inside. We have to save our kids whether they are bullied or they are bullying. They are all in pain.

(Cat Cora, 2011)

Depression "Depression is a state of low mood and aversion to activity that can have a negative effect on a person's thoughts, behavior, feelings, world view, and physical well-being" (Salmans, 1997).

The seminal scholarly work of the 17th century was English scholar Robert Burton's book, The Anatomy of Melancholy, sketch on several theories and the author's have experiences. Burton recommended that melancholy could be combated with a well diet, satisfactory sleep, music, and "meaningful work", along with discussion about the problem with a friend.

During the 18th century, the humeral theory of melancholia was increasingly challenged by mechanical and electrical explanations; references to dark and depressing states gave way to ideas of slowed circulation and exhausted energy. German physician Johann Christian Heinroth, however, argued melancholia was a disturbance of the soul due to moral conflict inside the patient.

Eventually, various authors proposed up to 30 different subtypes of melancholia, and alternative terms were suggested and discarded. Hypochondria came to be seen as a separate disorder. Melancholia and Melancholy had been used interchangeably until the 19th century, but the former came to refer to a pathological state and the latter to a disposition.

The term depression was derived from the Latin verb deprimere, "to press down". From the 14th century, "to depress" meant to subjugate or to bring down in spirits. It was used in 1665 in English author Richard Baker's Chronicle to refer to someone having "a huge depression of spirit", and by English author Samuel Johnson in a similar sense in 1753.

The powerful system put forward by Kraepelin cohesive nearly all types of mood disorder into manic-depressive insanity. Kraepelin worked from an assumption of underlying brain pathology, but also promoted a distinction between endogenous (internally caused) and exogenous (externally caused) types.

German psychiatrist Kurt Schneider coined the terms endogenous depression and reactive depression in 1920, the latter referring to reactivity in mood and not reaction to outside events, and therefore often misinterpreted. The dissection was challenged in 1926 by Edward Mapother who originates no clear distinction between the types.

The Unitarian view became more popular in the United Kingdom, while the binary view held sway in the US, influenced by the work of Swiss psychiatrist Adolf Meyer and before him Sigmund Freud, the father of psychoanalysis.

Freud had likened the state of melancholia to mourning in his 1917 paper Mourning and Melancholia. He theorized that objective loss, such as the loss of a valued relationship through death or a romantic break-up, results in subjective loss as well; the depressed individual has identified with the object of affection through an unconscious, narcissistic process called the libidinal cathexis of the ego.

The DSM-I (1952) limited depressive reaction and the DSM-II (1968) depressive neurosis, defined as an excessive reaction to internal conflict or an identifiable event, and also included a depressive type of manic-depressive psychosis within Major affective disorders.

In the mid-20th century, researchers theorized that depression was caused by a chemical imbalance in neurotransmitters in the brain, a theory based on observations made in the 1950s of the effects of reserpine and isoniazid in altering monoamine neurotransmitter levels and affecting depressive symptoms. During the 1960s and 70s, manic-depression came to refer to just one type of mood disorder which was distinguished from depression. The terms unipolar and bipolar had been coined by German psychiatrist Karl Kleist.

The term Major depressive disorder was introduced by a group of US clinicians in the mid-1970s as part of proposals for diagnostic criteria based on patterns of symptoms and was incorporated in to the DSM-III in 1980.To maintain consistency the ICD-10 used the same criteria, with only minor alterations, but using the DSM diagnostic threshold to mark a mild depressive episode, adding higher threshold categories for moderate and severe episodes.

Major depression Sometimes this is called major depressive disorder, clinical depression, unipolar depression or simply depression. It involves low moods, and loss of interest and satisfaction in usual activities, as well as other more common symptoms.

Melancholia is a term used to describe a severe form of depression in which several of the physical symptoms of depression are present. For example, one of the major changes is that the person moves more gradually. The person is also more likely to have depressed mood characterized by complete loss of pleasure in everything or almost everything.

Psychotic depression Sometimes people with a depressive disorder can lose touch with reality. Experiencing psychosis can involve hallucinations or delusions. People with this type of severe depression may believe they are bad or evil, being watched or followed, or feel as though everyone is against them (paranoia), or that they are the cause of infection or bad events occurring around them.

Bipolar disorder used to be known as 'manic depression' because the person experiences periods of depression as well as periods of mania. In between, there are periods of normal mood. Mania is like the opposite of depression and can vary in intensity - symptoms include feeling great, having plenty of energy, racing thoughts and little need for sleep, conversation fast, having trouble focusing on tasks, and feeling frustrated and irritable. This is not just a brief experience.

Dysthymia symptoms are similar to those of major depression, but are less severe. However symptoms of dysthymia last longer than those of major depression. A person has to have this milder form of depression for more than two years to be diagnosed with dysthymia.

Seasonal affective disorder (SAD) is a mood disorder that has a seasonal pattern. The source of the disorder is unclear, but it is deliberation to be related to the variation in light exposure in different seasons. SAD is characterized by mood disturbances (either periods of depression or mania) that begin and end in a particular season. Depression which starts in winter and subsides when the season ends is the most widespread.

Academic achievement or (academic) performance is the outcome of education - the extent to which a student, teacher or institution has achieved their educational goals (Annie Wardm, 1996).

Individual differences in academic performance have been linked to differences in intelligence and personality. Students with higher mental ability as verified by IQ tests (quick learners) and those who are higher in conscientiousness (linked to effort and achievement motivation) tend to accomplish highly in academic settings. A recent meta-analysis recommended that mental curiosity (as measured by typical intellectual engagement) has a significant influence on academic achievement in addition to intelligence and conscientiousness.

Children's' first few years of life are critical to the development of language and social skills. School vigilance in these areas help students adjust to academic expectancies.

Literature Review

Bullying is defined in different ways, but researchers agree that it is a form of aggression, and for bullying to occur, three characteristics must be present: (1) the behavior is meant to inflict physical and/or psychological harm, (2) the behavior must be repeated over time, and (3) there is an imbalance of power among the people involved (Banks, 1997).

Lynn Carney, another Penn State researcher, said, "It's the indirect aggression, such as spreading rumors and marginalizing a child that does the most damage" (Beattie-Moss, 2005). In the continuum of participants in a bullying situation, a person may be a bully, a victim, a bystander, a bully-victim, or a non-bully and non-victim. There are many stereotypes of each of these classifications; however, most of the stereotypes do not hold true. For example, although bullies may often choose victims who are physically smaller in stature, it is not true that the typical victim also has red hair and glasses (APA Conversations Series, 1995). In his book bullying at School, Dr. Dan Olweus gives general characteristics of both victims and bullies. Victims, generally, are physically weaker than peers, may have "body anxiety," are often quiet, shy, withdrawn, anxious, unassertive in peer groups, and closer to adults than to peers (Olweus, 1993). Some victims, however, are classified as" provocative victims" because they share some characteristics as those of bullies, including a "hot temper" and hyperactivity. Generally, bullies are seen to have the following characteristics: greater physical strength than classmates, the need to dominate others, hot-tempered, impulsive, "tough," low empathy, and are often oppositional, defiant, and aggressive toward adults (Olweus, 1993).

A bystander is a person, who witnesses the bullying behavior, and can either help or harm the situation depending on his or her actions, such as sustaining the bully or standing up for the victim. A bully-victims someone who has been a victim of bullying and later, becomes a bully himself. This sub-group, according to Perren and Hornung (2005), is the aggressive victims or provocative victims that Olweus discussed in his research. Non-bullies and non-victims, also known as the "non-involved pupils" in Perren and Hornung's study (2005), are students who well none of the other categories of students and are not involved in the bullying situation at hand, although it is unsurprising that these students at some point, will at least witness a bullying incident, even if they never bully or are victims of bullying.

Demographic Influences. Bullying behaviors are influenced by many factors including demographic variables, family, peers, and aggression. In 2000, Espelage et al. tested sex, grade, race, price of lunch, and poverty status as demographic variables. In their study, only sex was associated with bullying behavior, with males reporting more participation than females (2000). Nansel et al.'s study in 2001 shows the same results with respect to sex as a demographic variable, with males bullying and being bullied more than females. However, they also found some differences in bullying behaviors with respect to race, that Hispanic youth reported slightly more sensible and frequent bullying than other races, and that black students reported being bullied slightly less often than students of other races (2001, 4). The findings of Seals and Young in 2003 concur with the results of both Espelage et al. in 2000 and Nansel et al. in 2001, with males reporting more bullying than females. In addition, younger students, seventh graders compared to eighth graders, participated in more bullying behaviors than older students (Seals & Young, 2003).

Familial Influences. Family relations also influence bullying. According to the article by Cohn and Canter in 2003, two family influences on bullying are the amount of adult direction a child receives and seeing family members display bullying behaviors.

Because bullying occurs when one person exerts power over another person, children who are physically punished at home or who receive negative messages about themselves from people at home are more likely to bully in order to feel better about themselves (Cohn & Canter, 2003). In the 2000 study by Espelage et al., over seventeen percent of the middle school students reported at least sometimes being physically punished when breaking a rule at home. Almost thirty-four percent of the subjects spent more than an hour per day without adult supervision (Espelage et al., 2000). It is suggested that these students are at risk for exhibiting bullying behaviors than other students. Findings from research conducted by Espelage and Swearer in 2003 also support the hypothesis that family environment influences bullying. In their article "Research on school bullying and victimization: What have we learned and where do we go from here?" the authors cite sources who found associations between aggression and "a lack of family cohesion

(Gorman-Smith, Tolan, Zelli, & Huesmann, 1996), inadequate parental supervision

(Farrington, 1991), family violence (Thornberry, 1994), hostile discipline techniques

(Loeber & Dishion, 1983), and poor modeling of problem-solving skills (Tolan, Cromwell, & Braswell, 1986)" (Espelage & Swearer, 2003). Many of these aggressive behaviors lead to and are a part of bullying behaviors. In addition, it was found that many students who bully their peers in school also bully their siblings at home (Espelage & Swearer, 2003).

Peer Influences. Relationships with peers influence bullying as well. Even perceptions of peer involvement in negative behaviors can affect how students behave (Espelage et al., 2000). Espelage and Swearer, in their 2003 study, suggest that students will spend their time with other students who are similar to them, called homophile.

Furthermore, the subjects of the study formed peer groups with students who bullied at a similar frequency as they did (Espelage & Swearer, 2003). In addition, they suggested that the dominance theory can also explain adolescent bullying. The dominance theory is essentially the idea that in adolescence, particularly in middle school, children set up a hierarchy based on power or access to resources (Espelage & Swearer, 2003). Espelage and Swearer suggest that bullying is often a way that adolescents provide evidence their dominance (2003). In environments that do not tackle bullying behaviors, Cohn and Canter state, "some children may bully their peers in an effort to 'fit in' even though the behavior may make them uncomfortable" (2003, 2).

Aggression. Since bullying is a subset of aggression, different types of aggression can lead to dissimilar manifestations of bullying behaviors. Espelage and Swearer in 2003 list different types of aggression, including proactive versus reactive aggression, direct versus indirect aggression, overt versus covert aggression, and relational aggression.

Proactive aggression is when a person seeks a target for a certain purpose, like when a bully targets a weaker victim senseless (Espelage & Swearer, 2003). Reactive aggression is when a bully targets a victim as a result of an earlier incident that angered the bully (Espelage & Swearer, 2003). Overt, or direct, aggression includes physical or verbal bullying behaviors such as fighting, kicking, and name-calling, for example, and covert, or indirect, aggression includes a third-party through which the bullying occurs; it is not face-to-face, rather, it is social exclusion or rumor-spreading (Espelage & Swearer, 2003). Relational aggression is aggression or bullying that damages a relationship; it is when peer pressure is used to convince another person to participate in bullying either through verbal threats of social exclusion or even threats of physical harm, both of which serve to damage relationships (Espelage & Swearer, 2003). In a study by Crick and

Nelson (2002), the researchers found that victims of physical bullying were mainly boys, while victims of relational (or psychological) bullying were mainly girls. In addition, the authors found that more than seventy percent of girls in their study were victims of relational bullying, which included both verbal and psychological behaviors, such as saying, "My friend tells me she won't like me unless I do what she says" (2002, p. 601).

Emotional Influences. Other emotional factors affect bullying behaviors. A review of literature cited in Espelage and Swearer's 2003 article states that in 1999, Bosworth, found anger to be the strongest predictor of bullying. Depression is another major emotional factor related to bullying. In the same article, it was noted that depression levels are higher in victims as well as in bullies compared to non-bullies or non-victims (Espelage & Swearer, 2003).

School Influences. School environment affects the prevalence of bullying as well.

When school faculty members ignore bullying behaviors, students are reinforced for the behavior (Cohn & Canter, 2003). Similarly, less bullying occurs in schools where respect for others is taught and valued and where high standards are set for interpersonal behavior (Cohn & Canter, 2003, 2). Espelage and Swearer support these notions also: "If students attend schools in which bullying behaviors are accepted by adults and peers, it is plausible that they will engage in more of these behaviors" (2003).

Additionally, Ma, in 2002, reports that "schools with less bullying have positive disciplinary actions, strong parental involvement, and high academic standards" (Espelage & Swearer, 2003). Nansel report that poorer perceived school climate is related to bullying, while other factors such as poorer relationships with classmates and loneliness are related to being bullied and coincident bullying/being bullied (2001).

Community Influences. Though little research has focused on the effect of communities and neighborhoods on bullying behaviors, there is evidence that indicates that bullying may occur more frequently in neighborhoods that are perceived to be unsafe (Espelage, 2000). In the 2000 study by Espelage, "neighborhood safety concerns were strongly correlated with bullying behavior".

Barbara Coloroso, in her book The Bully, the Bullied, and the Bystander, cites fourteen specific examples of school shootings and teen suicides associated to peer harassment, one of them being the 1999 Columbine incident.

Another reason that educators need to be aware of the problems associated with bullying and the extent of bullying in our society is because of the effects that bullying has on students involved in bullying incidents. Bullying negatively affects bullies, victims, bully-victims, and bystanders. As previously stated, Banks' article "Bullying in schools" states that there is a strong correlation between bullying during school years and having criminal or legal problems in adulthood (1997). These problems affect the bullies' ability to have strong, positive relationships in their adult years (Banks, 1997).

Espelage and Swearer found that bullies in their study had clinically elevated depression levels (2003). The NEA's National Bullying Awareness Campaign states similar findings, including that bullies often perpetuate family violence in adulthood, and that forty percent of boys identified as bullies in sixth to ninth grades had three or more arrests by age thirty (www.nea.org).

Victims are also negatively affected by bullying. The NEA's National Bullying

Awareness Campaign states effects on victims of bullying, including fear of going to school, using the bathrooms in school, riding the bus to and from school, as well as physical symptoms of illness and a reduced ability to learn (www.nea.org). Espelage and Swearer in 2003 report similar findings, which state that depression is common in victims of bullying, and that anxiety may lead victims of bullying to avoid school. Banks (1997) reports that "as many as seven percent of America's eighth graders stay at home at least once a month because of bullies". He also reports that being a victim of bullying often increases a student's isolation because other students are afraid to associate with the victim for fear of becoming a victim of bullying too (1997).

Espelage and Swearer conducted some research on bully-victims and found that bully-victims have the highest level of depression compared to others along the continuum, had the highest risk for depression, and were the most at-risk for suicide ideation (2003). Bully-victims report to have higher levels of anxiety compared to either bullies or victims (Espelage & Swearer, 2003). Seals and Young reported in 2003 that bully-victims had the lowest self-esteem of everyone on the bullying continuum.

Less research has been conducted on the effects of bullying on bystanders; however, the NEA's National Bullying Awareness Campaign lists some negative consequences to being a bystander. Most of the consequences are negative emotions such as anger and helplessness for not knowing what to do, fear of being the next target, guilt for not taking action, and fear of certain areas of a school building (www.nea.org).

Pellegrini and Long (2002) studied the occurrence of bullying and victimization as students transition from primary school to secondary school. They found an initial increase in bullying and aggression among children during the transition to secondary school followed by a decline in bullying and aggressive behaviors. Shifting from primary school to a larger and less supportive environment can result in greater use of aggression as a strategy for establishing status among a changing peer group. On the other hand, victimization was found to decline from primary to secondary school. The researchers propose individuals who are initially victims in primary school have learned to avoid, disregard, or retaliate against bullies. Another proposed explanation is that bullies target a specific smaller group of victims. For example, a bully may target a student with a low peer status, but not target the entire population of students in the school (Long, 2002).

Distinct gender differences regarding the use of direct and indirect bullying behaviors have also been studied. Boys are often recognized as more frequently engaging in bullying behaviors and using more physical forms of bullying (Olweus, 1993).

However, school systems often fail to recognize girls' involvement in bullying. Girls are more likely to engage in indirect acts to damage an individual's peer relationships, feelings of acceptance, and inclusion in social groups (Tran, 2006). Indirect aggression can be an effective way for an aggressor to seek revenge or attention from a peer group (Merrell, 2006). The use of indirect aggression allows girls to become part of a group and feel a sense of importance among friends (Slee, 2000). Indirect aggression often goes undetected in the school environment and can even remain undetected in the classroom with a teacher present through the passing of notes, rumors, or the exclusion of an individual from a group (Smith, 1994).

Defining characteristics of bullies and victims has also contributed to the understanding of bullying. Bullies generally display aggressive, impulsive, and hostile tendencies and show insensitivity to the feelings of others (Olweus, 1993). There are several theories regarding factors which may contribute to bullying behavior. Aggressive and impulsive tendencies of bullies may have developed due to the exposure to parental models of aggression (Dodge, 1997). According to Dodge (1997), students who frequently use aggression misinterpret the behaviors of others and often rationalize that the victim deserved to get hurt. Bullies are thought to interpret the perceived weak stance of peers as an indication that they will receive positive outcomes (Fox & Boulton, 2006). Physical differences between a bully and victim can impact a bully's ability to assert dominance and control and decreases the likelihood that a victim will retaliate. A study conducted by Atlas and Pepler (1998) assessed bullying behaviors based on observations of children's interactions in the classroom. Height and weight ratings were coded for each episode of direct bullying that was observed. The relative estimates found bullies were often coded as being taller and heavier than victims in most instances of bullying. A power difference between a bully and victim is frequent in bullying situations (Pepler, 1998). Additionally, once an individual has been victimized he or she becomes an easy target and is likely to submit to another peer's control (Hunter, 2002).

An individual may be victimized due to physical difference or even achievement in school (Smokowski, 2005). Victimized individuals often feel responsible for the bullying situation (Smokowski, 2005). They are characteristically anxious, insecure, and cautious (Banks, 1997). Victims of frequent bullying are at risk of suffering depression, poor self-esteem, which may continue into adulthood, and a lack of engagement in school (Smokowski, 2005). They typically lack social support and are avoided by peers because others fear being bullied themselves or losing social status (Veenstra, 2005). The loss of peer support diminishes a victim's ability to cope with bullying (Lev-Wiesel, 2006).

Victims typically fear attending school; 7% of U.S. eighth graders have stayed home from school at least one day a month because of bullying (Smokowski, 2005). Victims avoid school to diminish bullying, resulting in the deterioration of academic success (Smokowski, 2005).

While some victims avoid bullying situations, some victims learn to retaliate productively alongside their bullying peer or peers. Victims who are likely to retaliate against peers are often considered to be highly aggressive and seem to provoke attacks from others (Bernstein & Watson, 1997). These individuals are often known to be bullies in one interaction and victims in another (Atlas & Pepler, 1998).

Cyber bullying is an invasive phenomenon which negatively impacts an individual (Patchin, 2006). Cyber bullying involves harassing others through the use of electronic media (Li, 2005). For example, individuals may post or send harmful messages through the internet as well as leave threatening text messages on a cell phone (Li, 2005). While some individuals may believe a victim has the ability to escape from bullying by deleting messages or going offline, the ability to escape is not often possible (Brown et al, 2006; Patchin & Hinduja, 2006). Hurtful messages may be broadcast worldwide and are often irretrievable (Brown et al, 2006). Rumors or gossip may spread throughout the school (Patchin & Hinduja, 2006). According to Brown (2006) online harassment can occur at school and home. Students who are electronically engaged can be cyber bullied at any time. As a result, individuals of cyber bullying experience a prolonged sense of victimization similar to other forms of bullying (Brown, 2006).

Li (2005) studied the extent of adolescents' experience of cyber bullying and the relationship between traditional bullying and cyber bullying. Overall, almost 54% of the students reported being bully-victims and over a quarter of the students reported being cyber bullied. Almost one in three students had bullied other students in a traditional setting, and almost 15% had bullied other students using electronic tools. One third of traditional bully-victims reported being cyber-victims and 16.7 % of traditional bully-victims reported they had cyber bullied others through electronic media (Li, 2005). Beran and Li (2005) surveyed 432 students from grades 7 to 9 to examine adolescents' experiences of cyber bullying. The majority of students who experienced cyber bullying were also victimized at school. More than half of the students who were victims of cyber bullying also reported victimization by other forms of bullying. Many students also indicated being negatively impacted by cyber bullying. The majority of students who were victimized by cyber bullying reported feeling angry, hurt, or sad (Beran & Li, 2005).

In traditional bullying, a power differential exists between the bully and victim which are often physical. However, individuals who cyberbully gain a sense of power and control behind a keyboard they do not experience during face-to-face interactions (Beran & Li, 2005). Victims of traditional bullying may use the internet as a place to assert dominance over others as compensation for being bullied in person (Ybarra & Mitchell, 2004). On the internet there is no central power or real explanation of territory, and victims can take on a more aggressive persona (Ybarra & Mitchell, 2004). As a result, victims recognize the advantages to using an electronic medium to bully. Individuals who are able to navigate and utilize technology are in a position of power relative to victims (Patchin & Hinduja, 2006).

Anonymity is often associated with online interactions and places an individual in a position of power as well as makes individuals less inhibited (Brown, 2006). According to Brown (2006) the internet allows individuals to take on a new identity. Cyberbullies may open temporary accounts or use a false identity to make it difficult for victims to discover them (Hinduja, 2006). Victims never really know who is involved in cyber bullying because cyber bullies deny or blame cyber bullying on someone else (Wiseman, 2007). Individuals who cyberbully often fail to see the harm they have caused or the consequences of their actions, which minimizes any feelings of remorse or empathy (MindOH! Foundation, 2007). Being anonymous limits cyberbullies' fear of being detected and makes it difficult for school personnel and parents to step in and stop bullying (Wiseman, 2007). Parents' lack of knowledge and awareness of online activities can also make it difficult to resolve cyber bullying.

Although individuals involved in cyber bullying recognize other students engage in similar behavior and believe this behavior is acceptable, cyberbullies are negatively impacting cyber-victims (Brown, 2006). Cyber-victims experience the same feelings of powerlessness and hopelessness as other victims of traditional bullying encounters (Brown, 2006). Victims express anger, fear, anxiety, and sadness as a result of cyber bullying as well as other forms of bullying (Beran & Li, 2005; Banks, 1997). Self-esteem can be severely crippled from bullying experiences (Patchin & Hinduja, 2006). Other individuals who are victimized may not be severely impacted by cyber bullying (Beran and Li, 2005). An individual may consider the online behavior to be expected or normal or may not attribute the hostile intent to the message (Li, 2005). It seems the differences in victims' emotional reactions to cyber bullying may be greatly impacted by the severity of the bullying situation. For example, a victim enduring years of cyber bullying death threats is going to be affected differently from someone receiving prank text messages for a week. Victims' responses to instances of cyber bullying may also differ due to the interpretation of social cues. The lack of social cues on the internet makes it difficult for individuals to interpret incoming messages (Ybarra, 2004). A victim is more likely to perceive a message or situation as threatening when they also report depressive symptoms outlined in the DSM-IV (Ybarra, 2004). While the majority of victims of cyber bullying choose to remain quiet when they are cyber bullied or know someone being cyber bullied (Li, 2005), Ybarra (2004) found adolescents who indicate symptoms of depression are more than three times more likely to report an incident of bullying than adolescents with milder symptoms. These adolescents are considered more vulnerable to negative experiences online. Thus, they are at risk for subsequent emotional distress which is likely to encourage help-seeking behavior (Ybarra, 2004).

While physical strength is important for direct bullying, cyber bullying involves emotional and psychological harm (Coyne, 2006). Cyber bullying can harm victims by damaging feelings of acceptance or group inclusion (Coyne, 2006). For example, cyberbullies often gain power and control through humiliation (Beran & Li, 2005). Cyber bullying is secretive and may spread information rapidly from one person to another (Li, 2006). Results from a study conducted by Ybarra and Mitchell (2004) found that aggressive adolescents frequently targeted people they knew in conventional environments; 84% of the aggressors indicated knowing the target in person. Cyberbullies may target individuals in their social group, knowing the target's address, phone number, or email due to their past friendship which they use to send threatening messages (Ybarra & Mitchell, 2004). Online and offline bullying are rooted in aggression, which may suggest that the internet may simply be an extension of school bullying (Ybarra & Mitchell, 2004).

Cyber bullying is also similar to conventional bullying in its repetitive nature (Mitchell, 2004). According to Ybarra and Mitchell (2004), 55% of internet targets indicated they were harassed more than once by the same individual. Individuals who act as an aggressor/ target and aggressor-only online viewed themselves as capable computer users (Ybarra, 2004). Individuals who spend more time online have a greater probability of becoming involved in cyber bullying (Ybarra, 2004). It was found that the average daily practice of the internet was similar for aggressor/ targets and targets-only. According to Mitchell (2004), the roles of aggressor and target online may not always be consistent with bully and victim roles in traditional settings. It was noted that some adolescents are exclusively involved in cyber bullying (Mitchell, 2004). The researchers explain this finding based on the fact that the internet equalizes power and has the ability to keep an identity unknown (Mitchell, 2004). Similar to victims of more traditional bullying, victims of cyber bullying often do not have the social support or ability to resolve difficulties (Brown, 2006; Ybarra, 2004). Although students believed they knew safety strategies to use online, it has been suggested that many students may not know that reporting incidents of cyber bullying to an adult can also be an effective strategy (Li, 2005). In a study conducted by Li (2005) students' open-ended responses in a survey indicated they equate protection strategies with staying away from chat rooms.

Although females have been recognized in the research as more likely to be indirect bullies and males have been recognized in the research as more likely to be direct bullies, it is not yet clear how gender plays a role in cyber bullying (Lamb, 2005). Li (2006) found that compared to females, males were more likely to be bullies and cyberbullies. An earlier study conducted by Li (2005) found 60% of the cyber-victims were females, while 52% of the cyber bullies were males (Li, 2005). An additional finding was that female victims of cyber bullying were more likely to report instances of cyber bullying to adults compared to male victims (Li, 2006). Although gender differences are manifest in cyber bullying behavior, both females and males are likely to be involved in cyber bullying (Li, 2005; Li, 2006).

Depression. Another internalizing symptom that can result from repeated bullying is depression. Fekkes and colleagues (2003) were interested in studying the relationship between bullying behavior and psychosomatic and psychological complaints such as depression, in order to educate the medical community in identifying and treating these symptoms. 2766 children from Dutch elementary schools were assessed cross-sectional before an ongoing longitudinal study was begun to implement and assess the effectiveness of an ant bullying program. The participants were given a questionnaire with items that assessed bullying behavior, psychosomatic symptoms, and health symptoms. The Short Form Depression Questionnaire for Children (KDVK) was also incorporated into the combined questionnaire to assess depression. The KDVK included nine items, resulting in a total score of 0 to 9. A score of 4 or greater indicated moderate depression, whereas 7 or greater was a strong indication of depression. Based on the results from questions asked in regard to bullying behavior, four groups were derived, including: (a) bully, (b) bully-victim, (c) victim, and (d) neither a bully nor a victim. Out of a total of 2,766 participants, 80.2% were not involved in bullying behavior; 14.2% were victims; 3.5% were bullies, and 2% were bully-victims. Victims were at a higher risk of psychosomatic complaints, including headaches, sleeping problems, and abdominal pain, because these were reported more frequently, in comparison with other groups. Also, victims reported a moderate degree of depression, which indicated that victims were more likely to experience depression, compared with those not involved in bullying behavior. Those participants categorized as bullies did not evidence strong symptoms of depression and psychosomatic complaints compared with those not involved in bullying behavior. However, bullies were associated slightly more frequently with bed-wetting and headaches compared with non-involved participants. Bully-victims evidenced a higher level of health symptoms compared with those not involved in bullying behavior; these included abdominal plain, bad appetite, bed wetting, and feeling tired. Additionally, bully-victims indicated a higher level of depression compared with those not concerned in bullying behavior.

Suicidal ideation and attempts. Tishler, Reiss, and Rhodes (2007) point out that suicide is the fourth highest leading cause of death for 12 year old adolescents.Additionally, adolescents with a psychiatric disorder are at a higher risk of committing suicide. Those victimized by peers are also at risk for socidality.

Klomek and colleagues (2007) designed a longitudinal study to assess suicidal ideation, suicidal attempts, and depression among those involved in bullying behavior.

Participants included 2,432 adolescents between 13 to 19 years of age in six New York

State high schools; this occurred between 2002 through 2004. A self-report questionnaire was designed with the Beck Depression Inventory, the Suicidal Ideation Questionnaire, questions about lifetime suicide attempts, and questions about bullying behavior. The results revealed that those involved in bullying behavior, being either a bully or victim, had a higher risk of suicide attempts, suicidal ideation, and depression. Those participants that bullied others more frequently and those more regularly victimized had a higher risk of developing depression, suicidal ideation and suicidal attempts.

Ivarsson and colleagues (2005) studied the level of suicidal and suicide attempts in various typologies of bullying involvement in Sweden. These researchers hypothesized a connection between suicidal and bullying, as well as varying social skills across the different bullying categories. 237 adolescents between the ages of 13 and 16 years participated by completing the Youth Self- Report (YSR), the Depression Self-Rating Scale (DSRS), Swedish version of the Beck Depression Inventory; a few questions were also incorporated about their involvement in bullying behavior. In addition, health records were reviewed, and the school health official provided a score on the Social and Occupational Functioning Scale. The results indicated that suicide attempts were related with bullying involvement, either as bully, victim, or bully-victim. There was no relationship between social skills and bully typology. Those identified as bully-victims have both internalizing and externalizing symptoms. Victims had higher internalizing symptoms, whereas bullies had more externalizing problems.

Suicidal behavior and violence have been explored separately, but Lubell and Vetter (2006) suggest that the association between suicidal attempts and violence towards others is more analogous than once thought. These researchers reviewed literature and found that when there is require of coping skills or problem solving aptitude, adolescents resort to other means of dealing with stressful emotions. More specifically, suicide or violence is more likely to occur as a means to escape or to avoid their emotional distress.

Cognitive Distortions of Bullies and Victims

Another psychosocial factor that is able to utilize to make difference between bullies and victims is cognitive distortions. Cognitive distortions are an individual's thoughts that inaccurately appraise a given situation without sufficient evidence to warrant the basis of the thought. Based on the following literature review, there are two categories of cognitive distortions: (a) self-serving and (b) self-debasing. Self-serving cognitive distortions are thoughts that improve one's self-worth and purpose; however, self debasing cognitive distortions are thoughts that blame oneself for one's shortcomings.

Self-serving. Cognitive distortions that function to improve one's perception, self-worth and purpose are called self-serving cognitive distortions. Various researchers delineate distortions in thinking that are labeled as self-serving cognitive distortions as being correlated with antisocial behavior (Gibbs, 1998).

Liau, Barriga, and Gibbs (1998) investigated self-serving cognitive distortions in a sample of 52 male delinquent adolescents, compared with 51 male non-delinquent adolescents between the ages of 14 to 18 years. The researchers hypothesized that delinquent adolescents would have higher levels of self-serving cognitive distortions and antisocial behavior. Additionally, overt and covert thoughts about behavior would align with overt and covert antisocial acts. Overt behaviors consist of direct behaviors such as fighting, whereas covert behaviors encompass indirect means of hurting others such as stealing and lying. The How I Think (HIT) Questionnaire was utilized to examine the frequency and type of self-serving cognitive distortions. In conjunction with HIT, the

Self-Reported Delinquency (SRD) scale was administered as an adapted version that excluded covert items. The results indicated that adolescents with antisocial behavior were highly correlated with cognitive distortions endorsed on the HIT. Additionally, delinquent youths scored higher on overt behaviors on the HIT compared with no delinquent youths as the control group. These results support the hypothesis that delinquent youth that obligate overt antisocial behaviors have more self-serving cognitive distortions.

In order to determine if self-serving and self-debasing cognitive distortions were correlated with internalizing and externalizing behaviors, Barriga, Landau, Stinson, Liau, and Gibbs (2000) administered self-report measures to adolescent delinquents between

13-19 years of age, and high school students between 15 and 19 years of age. Barriga and colleagues had 96 male and female incarcerated youth and 66 male and female high school students complete the HIT questionnaire, Children's Negative Cognitive Error

Questionnaire (CNCEQ), and Youth Self-Report (YSR). As stated previously, the HIT questionnaire measures self-serving cognitive distortions. The CNCEQ is a tool designed to measure self-debasing cognitive distortions, whereas the YSR assesses problems and competencies of adolescents. The results showed that delinquent adolescents scored higher on the HIT, CNCEQ, and YSR compared with the control group of high school students. As hypothesized, the HIT predicted those participants who had externalizing behaviors, whereas the CNCEQ predicted those with internalizing problems.

Toblin, Schwartz, Hopmeyer Gorman, and Abou-ezzeddine (2005) targeted the impact of psychosocial functioning of aggressive victims of bullying. Two-hundred and forty urban school students with a mean age of 9.5 participated by completing a self report inventory, a peer rating inventory, and an interview. The self-report inventory insisted of the Social Behavior Rating Scale, Emotion Regulation Checklist, and Children's Depression Inventory and Loneliness and Social Dissatisfaction questionnaire. Grade point average was also recorded. The researchers' classified participants into four groups, based on the peer nomination inventory, including: (a) aggressive victims, (b) passive victims, (c) bullies, and (d) normative contrasts. Each participant was classified according to high or low levels of aggression and victimization. For example, aggressive victims were high on aggression and victimization, while normative contrasts were low on both. The results suggested that aggressive victims had higher levels of emotional deregulation and hyperactivity compared with the additional groups. Passive victims had higher levels of depression, emotional deregulation, hyperactivity, and compliance withdrawal compared with normative contrasts. This research substantiates the fact that classifying multiple subgroups of bullying behavior in relation to levels of aggression and victimization would assist clinicians in formulating treatment goals that directly tackle the distinct symptoms for each particular subgroup.

Self-debasing. A second cluster of cognitive distortions, called self-debasing cognitive distortions, involve thoughts that blame oneself for one's shortcomings. These distortions include: (a) catastrophizing, (b) personalizing, (c) overgeneralization, and (d) selective abstraction (Bukstein, 1994).

Prinstein, Cheah, and Guyer (2005) refer to self-debasing cognitive distortions as serious self-referent attributions with their two samples of 116 kindergarteners and 159 adolescents. For the first study, the researchers hypothesized that those kindergarteners with self-referent attributions based on a hypothetical situation would exhibit more internalizing symptoms, such as depression, anxiety, and withdrawal from others. The results substantiated their hypothesis that children with self-referent attributions would evidence greater internalizing symptoms as well as poor peer experiences. With the second study, adolescents between the ages of 15 and 17 were given a hypothetical scenario; they then had to choose from a list of attributions, complete self-report measures and also a sociometric assessment of peers. Prinstein and colleagues hypothesized that those with more self referent attributions would reveal more internalizing symptoms, as well as being related to victimization by peers or another actual social stressor. As hypothesized, higher self referent attributions were associated to depressive symptoms and high self-referent attributions were related with high levels of peer rejection.

In order to determine if discrepancies exist between self-reports and peer-reports of aggression and victimization, Reyes and Prinstein (2004) studied with 203 adolescents between the ages of 15 and 17 years. Participants completed a sociometric assessment of their peers and also self-reports, which included the Children's Depression Inventory and the Revised Peer Experiences Questionnaire (RPEQ). Results indicated that boys with higher depressive symptoms overvalued their levels of overt victimization compared with peer-reports. In terms of relational and reputation victimization, boys and girls with higher levels of depressive symptoms overrated their victimization compared with peer reports.

Anat B.K and Frank Marrocco and others conduct a research on bullying the objective of their study to assess the association between bullying behavior and depression, suicidal ideation and suicide attempts among adolescents. They use the self report survey and result show that 9% of the sample reported being victimized frequently and 13% reported bullying others frequently. Frequent exposure to victimization or bullying others was related to high risks of depression, ideation, and suicide attempts compared with adolescents not involved in bullying behavior. Infrequently involvement in bullying behavior also was related to increased risk of depression and suicidality, mostly among girls. The finding indicates that both victims and bullies are high risk and that the most distressed adolescents are those who are both victims and bullies. Psychopathology was associated with bullying behavior both in and way from school.

In other research of Daniel Eisenberg, Justin Hunt, Ezra Golberstein the name "Mental Health and Academic Success in College in this study they find that depression is a significant predictor of lower GPA and higher probability of dropping out, calculating for prior academic performance and other variables.

The association between depression and academic outcomes is strongest among students with a activist anxiety disorder screen. In within-person estimates using our longitudinal sample, they find again that co-occurring depression and anxiety are associated with poorer GPA, and we find that symptoms of eating disorders are also associated with lower GPA.

While many studies judge the effect of physical health on human capital Outcomes. We focus here on the study investigate the effects of bullying and depression on academic achievements of university students.

Several studies describe the relationship between mental health early in life and succeeding educational attainment. Among studies that evaluate early-life mental health retrospectively, one study finds that early-onset (before adulthood) depression, is associated with less schooling (Berndt, 2000).whereas another study finds that a number of early-onset psychiatric disorders (although not major depression) are connected with early termination of schooling (Breslau 2008). Studies that use longitudinal data also find mixed indication on the relationship between early-life emotional and mental health and successive educational attainment. While a study using U.S. data finds that adolescent depression is positively correlated with high school drop-out and unenthusiastically correlated with college enrollment (Fletcher, 2008).

An additional two studies explore a multiplicity of psychiatric disorders, and find negative relations between mental illness during adolescence and graduating from high school (Marcotte, 2004).

Ding and colleagues find that depression leads to significantly lower GPA among high school students, and some evidence that concentration deficits reduce GPA, although the latter results are responsive to the model specification.

Only two studies, to our knowledge, specifically examine the relationship between mental health and academic outcomes during college. One recent study compares the GPA of 121 students during six months following a diagnosis of depression at the university's student health center to the GPA of a control group selected from the overall student population (Hysenbegasi, 2005). This study finds a significant, negative association between GPA and untreated depression. An essential restriction is that the study only includes students who presented to the student health center, and it is indistinct how this group might differ from the overall population of students with significant depressive symptoms.

A depressed mood is the experience of unhappiness or distress. Depression may involve feelings of being sad, weak, disappointed, frustrated, despair, helpless, and hopeless (Sarason, 2002). Many depressed individuals may be not capable to perform well in academic because they do not have courage in what they are doing. They may feel that they are not reaching the standard of performance set for them. As a result they continuously feel dissatisfied and hopelessness. They perceive things negatively and think about themselves as failure. This condition can absolutely contribute too many severe problems in their academic life such as poor grade.

Literatures have revealed that performance in school, college, or university was found to be affected by many symptoms of depression such as difficulties in deliberation, lack of interest and motivation, preoccupations, fatigability, and poor presence (Fine & Carlson, 1992). Many clinical evocative reports suggested that depression may be a contributing factor to low academic performance (Fine & Carlson, 1994). This notion was then supported by Zaid, Chan, and Ho (2007). The study on emotional disorders among medical students in one of Malaysian private colleges found that students who experienced depression had a lower academic performance.

Theoretical Framework

Social Learning Theory

The social learning theory proposed by Albert Bandura has become perhaps the most influential theory of learning and development. While rooted in many of the basic concepts of traditional learning theory, Bandura believed that direct reinforcement could not account for all types of learning.

His theory added a social element, arguing that people can learn new information and behaviors by watching other people. Known as observational learning (or modeling), this type of learning can be used to explain a wide variety of behaviors.

Social Dominance Theory (SDT)

SDT subscribes to the basis that human societies are prepared along group-based social hierarchies, with dominant and subordinate groups (Sidanius, 1999). The difference between the dominant and less dominant groups is related to the achievement of positive social value, which refers to the possession of desirable social and financial resources. Although individual characteristics play a role in attaining social power, SDT examines the social power that an individual gains by virtue of membership to a socially constructed group (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). The need to form group-based social hierarchies provides a conceptual framework to identify with prejudice, racism and discrimination. That is not to say that all group hierarchies are bad.

Cognitive behavior theory

According to cognitive behavioral theory, depressed people think differently than non-depressed people, and it is this difference in thinking that causes them to become depressed. For example, depressed people tend to view themselves, their environment, and the future in a negative, pessimistic light. As a result, depressed people tend to misinterpret facts in negative ways and blame themselves for any misfortune that occurs. This negative thinking and judgment style functions as a negative bias; it makes it easy for depressed people to see situations as being much worse than they really are, and increases the risk that such people will develop depressive symptoms in response to stressful situations.

Aaron Beck's Cognitive Theory of Depression

Different cognitive behavioral theorists have developed their own unique twist on the Cognitive way of thinking. According to Dr. Aaron Beck, negative thoughts, generated by dysfunctional beliefs are typically the primary cause of depressive symptoms. A direct relationship occurs between the amount and severity of someone's negative thoughts and the severity of their depressive symptoms. In other words, the more negative thoughts you experience, the more depressed you will become.

Rational of the study

Bullying is a serious issue which effects not just educational life of a person its effect the family and career life as well. In western society most of organization like Olweus prevention program working against bullying they give direct training and online courses which help the students that how they can safe their self from bullying. This program gives the training to those as well who bully other students.

This study will valuable for the students to know the consequences of bullying and how they circumvent it and accumulate their own selves from bullying and part of the people who bully others.

This study will also useful for the parents to understand the troubles of their children and find the core source of their children low academic achievement or their low mood.

This study will also functional for the psychologists and for counselors to understand the problems which face by the students because of bullying. And it provide help to reducing the bullying in educational setting and as well as in working setting. This study will beneficial to provide awareness to the students and to the administration of the educational institutes.

In the west different programs are working against bullying in different levels and the successful achieved their targets.

The goal of bullying prevention programs is to get better peer relations and make schools safe and positive places for students to learn and develop. With the frequency of school site bullying showing no signs of decline and the negative consequences of bullying on victims, bullies themselves, and bystanders well renowned, schools are struggling to implement effective bullying prevention programs.

The need for these programs is further illustrated by research that points to a lack of communication between students and staff regarding bullying behavior. Harris and Willoughby (2003) found that only 4% of students told a teacher or school administrator when they had been bullied and only 25% of student are perceived administrators as interested in stopping bullying. Harris (2003) reported that 43 % of students surveyed "did not know" if school personnel were fascinated in trying to stop bullying and 14% understood they were not engrossed at all. In both studies, however, most staff reported that they regarded all forms of bullying as destructive.

The researchers concluded those students' perceptions that school staff was not concerned in tumbling bullying was probably not accurate because staff had not conveyed their concerns to students.

McCartney (2005) discovered that victims usually don't tell teachers or school

administrators that they have been bullied because they "don't believe adults can do something about it; don't want other students to know they have a problem; fear being laughed at or not believed; fear it'll get worse if they tell; are shy and lack confidence to speak up; and don't want to hear adults say, 'Ignore it.'" Students want adults to ask about bullying problems, give opportunities to articulate confidentially with students, "keep an eye out" for bullying, and penalize bullies instead of just lecturing them.

The Olweus Bullying Prevention Program, developed and refined in Norway in the 1980s, is still the best known initiative for sinking bullying (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2004). The program is designed to raise understanding, improve peer relations, and intervene to stop intimidation, develop clear rules against bullying behavior, and support and defend victims. School staff, teachers, parents, members of the society, bullies, victims, and the silent majority of students are all involved in the program.

The defining characteristics of Olweus' program are that primary responsibility for solving problems is placed upon the adults at the school the entire school population is targeted with both individual leaning and systems-oriented components, and the program is a undeviating component of the school environment, not a temporary counteractive program.

The program intervenes on three levels:

School

The faculty surveys students anonymously to determine the nature and prevalence of the school's bullying problem. Supervision of students is increased during breaks, and school wide assemblies are conducted to discuss bullying issues. A conference is held to educate teachers, administrators, students, parents, and community members about bullying, response strategies, and available resources. Teachers receive additional training on how to implement the program.

A coordinating committee is formed to manage the program, typically comprised of an administrator, teacher from each grade level, guidance counselor, psychologist, and parent and student representatives. Ongoing meetings and discussions about bullying issues take place at regularly scheduled staff meetings and between parents and school staff.

Classroom

Teachers introduce and implement classroom rules against bullying, hold regular classroom meetings with students to discuss bullying, and meet with parents to encourage their participation. There are immediate consequences for aggressive behavior and immediate rewards for inclusive behavior.

Individual

School staff intervenes with bullies, victims, and their parents to stop bullying through role-playing activities and serious discussions.

Evaluations have found the program to be highly effective at the elemen